IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/matsoc/v57y2009i1p58-66.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Reason-based choice correspondences

Author

Listed:
  • Lombardi, Michele

Abstract

A reason-based choice correspondence rationalizes choice behaviour in terms of a two-stage choice procedure. Given a feasible set S, the individual eliminates from it all of the dominated alternatives according to her fixed (not necessarily complete) strict preference relation, in the first step. In the second step, first she constructs for each maximal alternative identified in the first step its lower contour set (i.e. the set of alternatives which are dominated by it in S), and then she eliminates from the maximal set all of those alternatives so that the following justification holds: there exists another maximal alternative whose lower contour set strictly contains that of another maximal alternative. This procedural model captures the basic idea behind the experimental finding known as "attraction effect". We study the rationalizability of reason-based choice correspondences axiomatically. We relate our choice-consistency conditions to standard consistency proprieties. Our characterization result offers testable restrictions on this 'choice anomaly' for large (but finite) set of alternatives.

Suggested Citation

  • Lombardi, Michele, 2009. "Reason-based choice correspondences," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 57(1), pages 58-66, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:matsoc:v:57:y:2009:i:1:p:58-66
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165-4896(08)00064-4
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Simonson, Itamar, 1989. "Choice Based on Reasons: The Case of Attraction and Compromise Effects," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 16(2), pages 158-174, September.
    2. Ariel Rubinstein & Yuval Salant, 2006. "Two Comments on the Principle of Revealed Preference," Levine's Bibliography 321307000000000272, UCLA Department of Economics.
    3. Paola Manzini & Marco Mariotti, 2006. "Two-stage Boundedly Rational Choice Procedures: Theory and Experimental Evidence," Working Papers 561, Queen Mary University of London, School of Economics and Finance.
    4. Michele Lombardi, 2008. "Uncovered set choice rules," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 31(2), pages 271-279, August.
    5. Jörg Rieskamp & Jerome R. Busemeyer & Barbara A. Mellers, 2006. "Extending the Bounds of Rationality: Evidence and Theories of Preferential Choice," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 44(3), pages 631-661, September.
    6. Amartya Sen, 1997. "Maximization and the Act of Choice," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 65(4), pages 745-780, July.
    7. Baigent, Nick & Gaertner, Wulf, 1996. "Never Choose the Uniquely Largest: A Characterization," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 8(2), pages 239-249, August.
    8. Sen, Amartya K, 1977. "Social Choice Theory: A Re-examination," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 45(1), pages 53-89, January.
    9. Ran Spiegler, 2002. "Equilibrium in Justifiable Strategies: A Model of Reason-based Choice in Extensive-form Games," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 69(3), pages 691-706.
    10. Amartya K. Sen, 1971. "Choice Functions and Revealed Preference," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 38(3), pages 307-317.
    11. Ehlers, Lars & Sprumont, Yves, 2008. "Weakened WARP and top-cycle choice rules," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 87-94, January.
    12. Paola Manzini & Marco Mariotti, 2007. "Sequentially Rationalizable Choice," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 97(5), pages 1824-1839, December.
    13. Marco Mariotti, 2008. "What kind of preference maximization does the weak axiom of revealed preference characterize?," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 35(2), pages 403-406, May.
    14. Sen, Amartya, 1993. "Internal Consistency of Choice," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 61(3), pages 495-521, May.
    15. Manzini, Paola & Mariotti, Marco, 2006. "Two-Stage Boundedly Rational Choice Procedures: Theory and Experimental Evidence," IZA Discussion Papers 2341, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    16. Eliaz, Kfir & Ok, Efe A., 2006. "Indifference or indecisiveness? Choice-theoretic foundations of incomplete preferences," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 56(1), pages 61-86, July.
    17. Amos Tversky & Itamar Simonson, 1993. "Context-Dependent Preferences," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 39(10), pages 1179-1189, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sürücü, Oktay, 2016. "Welfare improving discrimination based on cognitive limitations," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(4), pages 608-622.
    2. T. Hayashi & R. Jain & V. Korpela & M. Lombardi, 2023. "Behavioral strong implementation," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 76(4), pages 1257-1287, November.
    3. Tserenjigmid, Gerelt, 2019. "Choosing with the worst in mind: A reference-dependent model," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 157(C), pages 631-652.
    4. Demirkan, Yusufcan & Kimya, Mert, 2020. "Hazard rate, stochastic choice and consideration sets," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 142-150.
    5. Miguel Costa-Gomes & Georgios Gerasimou, 2020. "Status Quo Bias and the Decoy Effect: A Comparative Analysis in Choice under Risk," Papers 2006.14868, arXiv.org, revised Nov 2021.
    6. Yukinori Iwata, 2018. "Salience and limited attention," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 50(1), pages 123-146, January.
    7. Sürücü, Oktay & Brangewitz, Sonja & Mir Djawadi, Behnud, 2017. "Asymmetric dominance effect with multiple decoys for low- and high-variance lotteries," Center for Mathematical Economics Working Papers 574, Center for Mathematical Economics, Bielefeld University.
    8. Georgios, Gerasimou, 2013. "A Behavioural Model of Choice in the Presence of Decision Conflict," SIRE Discussion Papers 2013-25, Scottish Institute for Research in Economics (SIRE).
    9. Gomez, Yolanda & Martínez-Molés, Víctor & Urbano, Amparo & Vila, Jose, 2016. "The attraction effect in mid-involvement categories: An experimental economics approach," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(11), pages 5082-5088.
    10. Sürücü, Oktay & Djawadi, Behnud Mir & Recker, Sonja, 2019. "The asymmetric dominance effect: Reexamination and extension in risky choice – An experimental study," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 102-122.
    11. Hassan Nosratabadi, 2017. "Referential Revealed Preference Theory," Departmental Working Papers 201705, Rutgers University, Department of Economics.
    12. David M. Harrison & Kimberly F. Luchtenberg & Michael J. Seiler, 2023. "Improving Mortgage Default Collection Efforts by Employing the Decoy Effect," The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, Springer, vol. 66(4), pages 840-860, May.
    13. Georgios Gerasimou, 2016. "Asymmetric dominance, deferral, and status quo bias in a behavioral model of choice," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 80(2), pages 295-312, February.
    14. Maltz, Amnon & Rachmilevitch, Shiran, 2021. "A model of menu-dependent evaluations and comparison-aversion," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    15. Suzuki, Toru, 2019. "Choice set dependent performance and post-decision dissonance," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 24-42.
    16. Bleile, Jörg, 2016. "Limited Attention in Case-Based Belief Formation," Center for Mathematical Economics Working Papers 518, Center for Mathematical Economics, Bielefeld University.
    17. Bhavook Bhardwaj & Kriti Manocha, 2021. "Choice by Rejection," Papers 2108.07424, arXiv.org.
    18. Ayala Arad & Benjamin Bachi & Amnon Maltz, 2023. "On the relevance of irrelevant strategies," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 26(5), pages 1142-1184, November.
    19. Georgios Gerasimou, 2016. "Partially dominant choice," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 61(1), pages 127-145, January.
    20. Ayala Arad & Amnon Maltz, 2022. "Turning on Dimensional Prominence in Decision Making: Experiments and a Model," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(8), pages 6075-6099, August.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Lombardi, Michele, 2009. "Reason-based choice correspondences," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 57(1), pages 58-66, January.
    2. Georgios Gerasimou, 2016. "Partially dominant choice," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 61(1), pages 127-145, January.
    3. Michele Lombardi, 2008. "Uncovered set choice rules," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 31(2), pages 271-279, August.
    4. Tyson, Christopher J., 2008. "Cognitive constraints, contraction consistency, and the satisficing criterion," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 138(1), pages 51-70, January.
    5. Pinger, Pia & Ruhmer-Krell, Isabel & Schumacher, Heiner, 2016. "The compromise effect in action: Lessons from a restaurant's menu," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 14-34.
    6. Gerasimou, Georgios, 2010. "Rational indecisive choice," MPRA Paper 25481, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Manzini, Paola & Mariotti, Marco & Tyson, Christopher J., 2016. "Partial knowledge restrictions on the two-stage threshold model of choice," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 41-47.
    8. Attila Ambrus & Kareen Rozen, 2015. "Rationalising Choice with Multi‐self Models," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 125(585), pages 1136-1156, June.
    9. Manzini, Paola & Mariotti, Marco & Tyson, Christopher J., 2016. "Partial knowledge restrictions on the two-stage threshold model of choice," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 41-47.
    10. Bossert, Walter & Suzumura, Kotaro, 2007. "Social Norms and Rationality of Choice," Cahiers de recherche 2007-07, Universite de Montreal, Departement de sciences economiques.
    11. Alfio Giarlotta & Angelo Petralia & Stephen Watson, 2022. "Semantics meets attractiveness: Choice by salience," Papers 2204.08798, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2022.
    12. Susumu Cato, 2018. "Choice functions and weak Nash axioms," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 22(3), pages 159-176, December.
    13. Tyson, Christopher J., 2008. "Cognitive constraints, contraction consistency, and the satisficing criterion," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 138(1), pages 51-70, January.
    14. Heller, Yuval, 2012. "Justifiable choice," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 76(2), pages 375-390.
    15. Christopher Tyson, 2013. "Behavioral implications of shortlisting procedures," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 41(4), pages 941-963, October.
    16. Ferguson, Eamonn & Flynn, Niall, 2016. "Moral relativism as a disconnect between behavioural and experienced warm glow," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 163-175.
    17. Walter Bossert & Kotaro Suzumura, 2011. "Rationality, external norms, and the epistemic value of menus," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 37(4), pages 729-741, October.
    18. Brian Hill, 2011. "Deferral, incomplete preferences and confidence," Working Papers hal-00625420, HAL.
    19. Raphaël Giraud, 2005. "Anomalies de la théorie des préférences. Une interprétation et une proposition de formalisation," Revue économique, Presses de Sciences-Po, vol. 56(4), pages 829-854.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Incomplete preferences Reason-based choice Revealed preferences;

    JEL classification:

    • D0 - Microeconomics - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:matsoc:v:57:y:2009:i:1:p:58-66. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/505565 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.